News
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk explains why Blue Origin’s Starship lawsuit makes no sense
For the first time since SpaceX competitor Blue Origin took NASA to federal court after losing a Moon lander contract to Starship and a protest over that loss, unsealed documents have finally revealed the argument Jeff Bezos’ space startup is focusing on in court.
After the details broke in new court documents filed on Wednesday, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk weighed in on Twitter to offer his take on why the arguments Blue Origin has hinged its lawsuit on make very little sense.
While one seemingly significant portion of the main complaint claiming to reveal “additional substantial errors” in SpaceX’s Starship HLS proposal was almost fully redacted, most of the opening argument is legible. In short, Blue Origin appears to have abandoned the vast majority of arguments it threw about prior to suing NASA and the US government and is now almost exclusively hinging its case on the claim that SpaceX violated NASA’s procurement process by failing to account for a specific kind of prelaunch review before every HLS-related Starship launch.
For NASA’s HLS competition, SpaceX proposed to create a custom variant of Starship capable of serving as a single-stage-to-orbit crewed Moon lander with the help of the rest of the Starship fleet – including Super Heavy boosters, cargo/tanker Starships, and a depot or storage ship. SpaceX would begin a Moon landing campaign by launching a (likely heavily modified) depot Starship into a stable Earth orbit. Anywhere from 8 to 14 Starship tanker missions – each carrying around 100-150 tons of propellant – would then gradually fill that depot ship over the course of no more than six or so months. Once filled, an HLS lander would launch to orbit, refill its tanks from the depot ship, and make its way to an eccentric lunar orbit to rendezvous with NASA’s Orion spacecraft and three Artemis astronauts.
As Blue Origin has exhaustively reminded anyone within earshot for the last five months, SpaceX’s Starship Moon lander proposal is extremely complex and NASA is taking an undeniable risk (of delays, not for astronauts) by choosing SpaceX. Nevertheless, NASA’s Kathy Lueders and a source evaluation panel made it abundantly clear in public selection statement that SpaceX’s proposal was by far the most competent, offering far a far superior management approach and technical risk no worse than Blue Origin’s far smaller, drastically less capable lander.
The bulk of Blue Origin’s argument appears to be that its National Team Lander proposal was drastically disadvantaged by the fact that SpaceX may or may not have incorrectly planned for just three ‘flight readiness reviews’ (FRRs) for each 16-launch HLS Starship mission. While heavily redacted, Blue Origin wants a judge to believe that contrary to the US Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) fair assessment that such a small issue is incredibly unlikely to have changed the competition’s outcome, it would have “been able to propose a substantially lower price” for its lander. To be clear, a flight readiness review is an admittedly important part of NASA’s safety culture, but it ultimately amounts to paperwork and doublechecks over the course of a day or two of meetings.
All else equal, the need to complete an FRR before a launch is incredibly unlikely to cause more than a few days of delays in a worst-case scenario and would have next to no cost impact. There is no reasonable way to argue that being allowed to complete some launches without an FRR would have singlehandedly allowed Blue Origin to “[engineer] and [propose] an entirely different architecture.” Nevertheless, that’s exactly what the company attempts to argue – that it would have radically and completely changed the design it spent more than half a billion dollars sketching out if it had only been able to skip a few reviews.
Curiously, Blue Origin nevertheless does make a few coherent and seemingly fact-based arguments in the document. Perhaps most notably, it claims that when NASA ultimately concluded that it didn’t have funds for even a single award (a known fact) and asked SpaceX – its first choice – to make slight contract modifications to make the financial side of things work, NASA consciously chose to waive the need for an FRR before every HLS Starship launch. Only via purported cost savings from those waived reviews, Blue Origin claims, was NASA able to afford SpaceX’s proposal – which, it’s worth noting, was more than twice as cheap as the next cheapest option (Blue Origin).
Ultimately, it thus appears that Blue Origin may have a case to make that NASA awarded SpaceX the HLS Option A contract despite a handful of errors that violated contracting rules and the HLS solicitation. Relative to just about any other possible issue, though, it’s hard not to perceive the problems Blue Origin may or may have correctly pointed out as anything more than marginal and extraordinarily unlikely to have changed the outcome in Blue’s favor had they been rectified before the award. Most importantly, even if Blue Origin’s argument is somehow received favorably and a judge orders NASA to overturn its SpaceX HLS award and reconsider all three proposals, it’s virtually inconceivable that even that best-case outcome would result in Blue Origin receiving a contract of any kind.
Elon Musk
The Boring Company’s Vegas Loop moves 82k riders during CONEXPO
The Loop’s feat was highlighted by The Boring Company in a post on its official account on social media platform X.
The Boring Company said its Vegas Loop system transported roughly 82,000 passengers during the recent CONEXPO-CON/AGG construction trade show in Las Vegas. The event was held at the Las Vegas Convention Center (LVCC) from March 3-7, 2026.
The Loop’s feat was highlighted by The Boring Company in a post on its official account on social media platform X.
CONEXPO-CON/AGG 2026
CONEXPO-CON/AGG is one of the largest construction trade shows in North America. This year’s event was quite impressive, attracting more than 140,000 construction professionals from 128 countries across the world.
Considering the number of this year’s attendees, the LVCC Loop seemed to have proven itself to be a very useful transportation solution. A video posted by The Boring Company on its official X account featured attendees expressing their enthusiasm for the underground transport system, with some stating that they would like to see similar tunnels across Las Vegas.
The LVCC Loop is only part of the greater Vegas Loop network, which is actively under construction.
New Vegas Loop extensions
One of the newest additions is a station at the Fontainebleau Las Vegas resort on the Strip. The station is located on level V-1 of the resort’s south valet area, according to a report from the Las Vegas Review-Journal. From the Fontainebleau, passengers can travel free of charge to stations serving the Las Vegas Convention Center, as well as to Loop stations at Encore and Westgate.
The system is also expanding beyond the Strip corridor. In December, The Boring Company began offering Vegas Loop rides to and from Harry Reid International Airport. These trips include a limited above-ground segment after receiving approval from the Nevada Transportation Authority to allow surface street travel tied to Loop operations.
The Boring Company President Steve Davis previously told the Review-Journal that the University Center Loop segment, which is currently under construction, is expected to open in the first quarter of 2026. The extension would allow Loop vehicles to travel beneath Paradise Road between the convention center and the airport, with a planned station just north of Tropicana Avenue.
News
Tesla preps to build its most massive Supercharger yet: 400+ V4 stalls
The project will be an expansion of the current Eddie World Supercharger in Yermo, California, and will take place in several stages.
Tesla is preparing to build its most massive Supercharger yet, as it recently submitted plans for an over 400-stall Supercharging station in California, which would dwarf its massive 168-stall location in Lost Hills, California.
The project will be an expansion of the current Eddie World Supercharger in Yermo, California, and will take place in several stages.
The expansion, adjacent to the existing Eddie World Supercharger, which is currently comprised of 22 older V2 and V3 stalls limited to 150 kW, unfolds across six phases.
Construction on Phase 1 begins later this year with 72 V4 stalls. Subsequent stages will progressively add hundreds more, culminating in over 400 next-generation chargers. Site plans label expansive parking arrays across Phases 1–5 along Calico Boulevard, with Phase 6 design still to be determined.
Tesla is planning an absolutely massive Supercharger expansion in Yermo, California!!
Over the course of 6 phases, Tesla is set to add over 400 V4 stalls in a commercial development known as Eddie World 2.
The first phase, which should begin construction sometime this year,… pic.twitter.com/ks5Y5dE8lR
— MarcoRP (@MarcoRPi1) March 6, 2026
The project was first flagged by MarcoRP, a notable Tesla Supercharger watcher.
Strategically located midway on I-15 between Los Angeles and Las Vegas, the station targets heavy EV traffic on this high-demand corridor.
The surrounding 20-mile stretch already hosts over 200 high-power stalls (including 40 at 250 kW, 120 at 325 kW, and more), plus 96 in nearby Baker—yet bottlenecks persist during peak travel.
In scale, it eclipses all existing Tesla Superchargers. The current record holder, the solar- and Megapack-powered “Project Oasis” in Lost Hills, California, offers 164 stalls. Barstow’s former leader had 120. Eddie World 2 will be more than double that size, cementing Tesla’s dominance in ultra-high-capacity charging.
Tesla finishes its biggest Supercharger ever with 168 stalls
Development blends charging with convenience. Architectural drawings show integrated retail: a 10,100 square foot Cracker Barrel, a 4,300 square foot McDonald’s, a 3,800 square foot convenience store, additional restaurants, drive-thrus, outdoor dining, and lease space.
EV-centric features include pull-through bays for Cybertrucks and trailers, ensuring accessibility for larger vehicles and future Semi trucks.
News
Tesla makes latest move to remove Model S and Model X from its lineup
Tesla’s latest decisive step toward phasing out its flagship sedan and SUV was quietly removing the Model S and Model X from its U.S. referral program earlier this week.
Tesla has made its latest move that indicates the Model S and Model X are being removed from the company’s lineup, an action that was confirmed by the company earlier this quarter, that the two flagship vehicles would no longer be produced.
Tesla has ultimately started phasing out the Model S and Model X in several ways, as it recently indicated it had sold out of a paint color for the two vehicles.
Now, the company is making even more moves that show its plans for the two vehicles are being eliminated slowly but surely.
Tesla’s latest decisive step toward phasing out its flagship sedan and SUV was quietly removing the Model S and Model X from its U.S. referral program earlier this week.
The change eliminates the $1,000 referral discount previously available to new buyers of these vehicles. Existing Tesla owners purchasing a new Model S or Model X will now only receive a halved loyalty discount of $500, down from $1,000.
The updates extend beyond the two flagship vehicles. New Cybertruck buyers using a referral code on Premium AWD or Cyberbeast configurations will no longer get $1,000 off. Instead, both referrer and buyer receive three months of Full Self-Driving (Supervised).
The loyalty discount for Cybertruck purchases, excluding the new Dual Motor AWD trim level, has also been cut to $500.
NEWS: Tesla has removed the Model S and Model X from the referral program.
New owners also no longer get a $1,000 referral discount on a new Cybertruck Premium AWD or Cyberbeast. Instead, you now get 3 months of FSD (Supervised).
Additionally, Tesla has reduced the loyalty… pic.twitter.com/IgIY8Hi2WJ
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) March 6, 2026
These adjustments apply only in the United States, and reflect Tesla’s broader strategy to optimize margins while boosting adoption of its autonomous driving software.
The timing is no coincidence. Tesla confirmed earlier this year that Model S and Model X production will end in the second quarter of 2026, roughly June, as the company reallocates factory capacity toward its Optimus humanoid robot and next-generation vehicles.
With annual sales of the low-volume flagships already declining (just 53,900 units in 2025), incentives are no longer needed to drive demand. Production is winding down, and Tesla expects strong remaining interest without subsidies.
Industry observers see this as the clearest sign yet of an “end-of-life” phase for the vehicles that once defined Tesla’s luxury segment. Community reactions on X range from nostalgia, “Rest in power S and X”, to frustration among long-time owners who feel perks are eroding just as the models approach discontinuation.
Some buyers are rushing orders to lock in final discounts before they vanish entirely.
Doug DeMuro names Tesla Model S the Most Important Car of the last 30 years
For Tesla, the move prioritizes efficiency: fewer discounts on outgoing models, a stronger push for FSD subscriptions, and a focus on high-margin Cybertruck trims amid surging orders.
Loyalists still have a narrow window to purchase a refreshed Plaid or Long Range model with remaining incentives, but the message is clear: Tesla’s lineup is evolving, and the era of the original flagships is drawing to a close.
The Boring Company’s Vegas Loop moves 82k riders during CONEXPO
Tesla preps to build its most massive Supercharger yet: 400+ V4 stalls
